Minority Programs Update

Fall 1996

The NIGMS Minority Programs Update is produced by the Public Information Office of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. The material is not copyrighted, and we encourage its use or reprinting.

Editor:
Susan Athey
Public Information Office, NIGMS
Room 3AS.43
45 Center Drive MSC 6200
Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
Telephone: (301) 496-7301
Fax: (301) 402-0224
e-mail atheys@nigms.nih.gov

Marvin Cassman Named NIGMS Director

by Ann Dieffenbach, Public Information Office, NIGMS

NIH director Harold Varmus, M.D., has appointed Marvin Cassman, Ph.D., as the new director of NIGMS. Cassman has been deputy director of NIGMS since 1989, and has served as the Institute's acting director since July 1993.

"Dr. Cassman is an outstanding scientist and scientific program manager whose skills are ideally suited for this position at the helm of NIH's 'basic research institute.' His expertise in such areas as structural biology, biotechnology, science policy, and technology transfer will be especially valuable at NIGMS and at NIH as a whole," Varmus said.

"Over the years, Dr. Cassman has proven himself to be astute at perceiving trends in biomedical science and innovative in creating new approaches to meet areas of opportunity or need," Varmus added. "His many accomplishments include a program to determine high-resolution molecular structures for use in designing antiviral drugs targeted against AIDS and a program to provide shared biomedical research instrumentation that has become a model for similar efforts at NIH and elsewhere."

Cassman was selected after a nationwide search by a committee of distinguished scientists, which recommended top candidates to Varmus.

"A major role of NIGMS is to ensure the long-term health and productivity of the basic biomedical research enterprise," said Cassman. "This means, among other things, bringing new investigators into the system--particularly underrepresented minorities--in appropriate numbers through both training and research support, encouraging innovative ideas, and linking the basic science output to the requirements of society. All of this needs to be done while attempting to provide some stability to the many outstanding investigators whose ongoing research accomplishments are making the end of the 20th century one of the great periods for science in history. Attempting to balance these demands is a challenge to which we must all respond, and I look forward to leading NIGMS in its efforts to meet this challenge."

After receiving bachelor's and master's degrees from the University of Chicago, Cassman earned a Ph.D. in biochemistry in 1965 at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Following a postdoctoral fellowship in the laboratory of Dr. Howard Schachman at the University of California, Berkeley, Cassman joined the faculty of the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Cassman came to NIGMS in 1975 as a health scientist administrator in the Cellular and Molecular Basis of Disease Program. In 1978, he was named chief of the program's Molecular Basis of Disease Section, and in 1985, he became director of the NIGMS Biophysics and Physiological Sciences Program. He has also worked in the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, as a senior policy analyst, and as a legislative fellow on the staff of the House Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Technology.

Among the NIH committees on which Cassman has served are the AIDS Executive Committee, the Bioengineering Working Group, and the Task Force on the Commercialization of Intellectual Property Rights from NIH-Funded Extramural Research. In 1995, Cassman chaired a committee that examined the organization and activities of the NIH Division of Research Grants and made recommendations to Varmus. Many of these recommendations have been or are now being implemented. He is also a member of the National Science Foundation Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences and of the advisory board of Chemical and Engineering News.

Cassman's honors and awards include the 1991 Presidential Meritorious Executive Rank Award and the 1983 NIH Director's Award. He is a member of the Protein Society and the American Chemical Society.

NIGMS Meeting Brings Together Minority Program Directors

The NIGMS Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) Division sponsored a 3-day conference this past spring that brought together directors of its research and training programs at minority institutions. The goals of the meeting were to facilitate connections, promote dialogue, and provide technical assistance to MORE grantees.

Dr. Ruth L. Kirschstein, NIH deputy director, welcomed the nearly 400 participants and reiterated NIH's commitment to minority programs. She said that NIH will continue to support programs that provide "opportunities for those who have not had such opportunities before," but she acknowledged that the overall climate in which such programs operate throughout the country is changing.

Meeting participants were also greeted by Dr. John Ruffin, NIH associate director for research on minority health, and Dr. Marvin Cassman, NIGMS director, who characterized the meeting as "offering participants opportunities for learning and dialogue."

The meeting's keynote address was delivered by Dr. Matthew Weinberg, president of The Weinberg Group, a consulting firm that assists lawyers and companies involved in technically oriented litigation and regulatory issues. Weinberg's speech, "Too Many Ph.D.'s?", focused on alternative careers for Ph.D.'s trained in the sciences. He stated that "the need for science expertise has never been greater," and noted that Ph.D.'s can work in a wide variety of fields, including policy making, regulatory approval, finance, law, consumer activities, corporations, consulting, and associations.

A special panel discussion held during the first day of the meeting addressed the recruitment of minority students to NIH-supported predoctoral research training programs. The panel members were Dr. Jose M. Cimadevilla of St. Mary's University in Texas; Dr. Isabella Finkelstein of Clark Atlanta University; Dr. Bharati Mehrotra of Tougaloo College in Mississippi; Dr. Glenn D. Kuehn of New Mexico State University; Dr. Pamela Stanley of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York; Dr. Glenn Gaulton of the University of Pennsylvania; and Dr. Palmer Taylor of the University of California, San Diego. Dr. John Norvell, NIGMS assistant director for research training, served as the moderator. Panel members stressed the value of summer research experiences, especially when students do research outside their home institutions. Among the benefits of these summer experiences are linkages to universities where students might later pursue graduate degrees; the opportunity for mentoring by faculty at these universities; and exposure to research at larger, more research-intensive institutions.

Meeting attendees participated in workshops on such topics as program evaluation and writing progress reports, as well as hands-on demonstrations of the World Wide Web and useful resources available on it. Special training was offered on the NIGMS interactive Electronic Student Tracking and Reporting system, which will be used in administering the Bridges to the Future Program and will be a model system for other NIGMS training programs. (The Bridges Program promotes partnerships between institutions to encourage continued education of underrepresented minorities toward careers in biomedical research.)

Problem-solving sessions were held, along with sessions that enabled program directors to share information on programs that work. One featured program was the Pre-Research Workshop, developed for new Minority Biomedical Research Support (MBRS) and Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC) students at the University of California, Santa Cruz and California State University, San Diego. This program offers training in laboratory skills, introduces students to faculty research projects on which they could work, and helps students get to know one another and learn how to work as a group.

Dr. Clifton Poodry, director of the MORE Division, said, "The feedback we received from participants told us that the objectives of the meeting were largely met." Poodry said that NIGMS staff members "found the one-on-one interactions with the program directors most informative and helpful," and added that the MORE Division plans to make the meeting a biennial event. In alternating years, the MORE Division is planning to have smaller, program-specific meetings.

In addition to the many demonstrations and workshops, participants were also given the opportunity to meet individually with NIH staff to address the specific concerns and needs of their programs and institutions. (Several of these topics are addressed in this issue; see "MBRS Program Directions and Peer Review" and "Evaluation of MORE Programs.")

Ernest Márquez Appointed MBRS Director

Dr. Ernest D. Márquez, a microbiologist with extensive background in scientific review administration, has been appointed director of the MBRS Program.

Márquez returns to NIGMS after 3 years with the National Institute of Nursing Research, where he served as executive secretary of the National Advisory Council for Nursing Research and chief of the Office of Review. From 1990-1993, Márquez was a scientific review administrator at NIGMS with responsibility for managing the review of MBRS grant applications.

"Dr. Márquez brings NIGMS a vast array of experiences that will serve him well as MBRS director," said Dr. Clifton Poodry, director of the MORE Division. "He has earned the trust and respect of colleagues and of the minority community through his experience in review activities at NIH. In addition, he is very aware of what it takes to inspire and motivate students in the biomedical sciences."

Márquez succeeds Dr. Ciriaco Q. Gonzales, who directed the MBRS Program from 1975-1995 and who is now director of the Division of Disadvantaged Assistance in the Bureau of Health Professions at the Health Resources and Services Administration.

Prior to coming to NIH, Márquez worked for 8 years in the biotechnology industry. Starting as an independent consultant, he later worked for several companies, including Ortho Diagnostic Systems, Inc. in Cambridge, MA, and Cambridge BioScience Corporation in Worcester, MA, where he was the director of microbiology product development. From 1973-1984, Márquez was a faculty member in the department of microbiology at The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine in Hershey.

Márquez is active on a number of NIH committees, including the Staff Training in Extramural Programs Committee, the Training Activities Committee, and the Improving Peer Review Committee. In addition, he is president of the NIH Hispanic Employees Organization.

Márquez earned a B.A. in biology and an M.A. in biology (microbiology) from California State University at Fresno, and a Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of Southern California School of Medicine in Los Angeles. Both his predoctoral and postdoctoral research fellowships were supported by NIH.

MBRS Program Directions and Peer Review

by Ernest Márquez, Ph.D., MBRS Program, NIGMS, and Michael Sesma, Ph.D., Office of Scientific Review, NIGMS

Participants in the spring 1996 meeting of minority program directors had many questions about changes in the MBRS Program and the review of MBRS grant applications. What follows is a sampling of the questions that were received during the meeting's workshops and NIGMS' responses to them.

Has the mission of MBRS changed?

The overall mission of the MBRS Program remains essentially the same as it has since its inception--to increase the number of underrepresented minorities participating in biomedical research. Toward this end, support continues to be awarded to institutions to improve their ability to carry out research through infrastructure improvement, to provide investigators with release time and funding to carry out research, and to provide opportunities for students to engage in biomedical research.

Has there been a shift in emphasis from student development to research?

The emphasis has never been totally on student development, but on a multifaceted approach to providing support to the institution, to the investigator, and to student development. However, an advisory committee to NIGMS and the MBRS Program concluded in 1992 that the program must have high-quality research as its primary underpinning. The committee further concluded that student development in the absence of high-quality research was a disservice to the students. At present, it is possible to have a research project on an S06 application that does not include students. In addition, most MBRS programs find the number of students they can engage in research activities to be limited by the number of currently funded subprojects. In an effort to enable institutions to provide student development activities in cases where research programs are just beginning to develop, the MBRS Program allows these activities to use other resources. These resources could include, but would not be limited to, participation in research being carried out by other funded laboratories (at the institution or elsewhere) and participation in workshops, seminars, and other research-related activities.

Who determines the review criteria for MBRS research projects?

The NIGMS program staff are responsible for developing the review criteria. These have evolved along with the program over the years. The current review criteria are reinforced by the recommendations of the 1992 advisory committee report. The report emphasized the need to develop and sustain hypothesis-driven research projects in all areas of biomedical science at minority institutions in order to fulfill the long-standing goals of the program. From these recommendations, MBRS Program staff developed application guidelines and review criteria that are applied by reviewers under the guidance of the NIGMS Office of Scientific Review. The primary consideration in evaluation of individual research projects is the scientific merit and biomedical relevance of the proposed project. Student involvement in research subprojects is considered separately from the scientific merit of the project.

How are multiple project applications reviewed?

The overall application is evaluated by the MBRS Review Subcommittee, but first the individual subprojects are reviewed in ad hoc panels organized around a general research discipline such as genetics/molecular biology/biochemistry, neurobiology/behavioral neuroscience, chemistry, and pharmacology/toxicology. The individual subprojects from all of the applications in a particular cycle are separated into such scientific discipline groupings by the NIGMS scientific review administrators in order to allow them to organize a group of review consultants with appropriate expertise in related areas of science. In this way, projects can be reviewed by investigators familiar with the literature and the approaches or tools typical for that area of research, rather than asking scientists with inappropriate expertise to evaluate the subprojects. This practice of reviewing projects in discipline-specific panels began in early 1994 and continues to develop.

How are reviewers selected and who chooses them?

All members of the MBRS Review Subcommittee are asked to serve on review panels appropriate to their areas of research expertise. Other reviewers are drawn from the ranks of successful and productive MBRS and MARC investigators, other scientists at minority institutions or schools of similar size and mission, and both minority and non-minority investigators from research universities and industry in the United States. The criteria in selecting reviewers are expertise in an area of investigation appropriate to the projects under consideration and evidence of research success, as indicated by a history of research grant support and research publications. The composition of MBRS scientific review panels includes investigators of all ranks, with at least 50 percent of the reviewers serving on any panel being from MBRS or MARC institutions. Most of the reviewers have had extensive review experience as a result of service on previous MBRS or MARC panels, NIH study sections, or other review groups. To augment the expertise of the panel members, when needed, outside opinions are obtained by mail from investigators with appropriate expertise in a given area of research. These reviewers receive the same instructions as those who participate in the panel meeting.

What happens during a review meeting?

Each subproject has at least three assigned reviewers, with the primary and secondary reviewer having the most appropriate expertise necessary to evaluate the project. Prior to the discussion of an individual application, a brief description of the institution is provided to the panel in order to discuss the project in the context of the research setting. This description includes the size and mission of the school, its MBRS history, and a general description of campus or departmental resources. After the project is described, each reviewer provides a critique of the project aims, objectives, approach, and rationale. This is followed by a general discussion in which the entire panel may participate. Following the discussion, each panelist assigns a priority score to the project and then the assigned reviewers make budget recommendations and may raise issues related to animal welfare, human subjects, or biohazards. The review of the project ends with an assessment of student participation in the project.

Evaluation of MORE Programs

by Clifton Poodry, Ph.D., Division of Minority Opportunities in Research, NIGMS

There were two workshops on the topic of evaluation at the spring 1996 meeting of minority program directors. Many questions were raised during these sessions concerning what program evaluation means and why it is important. Listed below are a few of the questions raised by program directors during the meeting, along with the MORE Division's responses:

What does evaluation mean to the MORE Division and why is it so important?

The term "evaluation" evokes a broad range of responses, often visceral ones. People commonly associate the term with being evaluated, a process that may be stressful depending on the uses of the evaluation. Many people associate evaluation with being graded. Under this view of evaluation, there is something to win, such as a high course grade, a promotion, or a grant if the evaluation is very positive. But there is also the specter of losing something if the outcome is poor or in some cases just not outstanding. This is not what those of us in the MORE Division envision when we discuss evaluation. So, what do we envision? Science! Experiments! New knowledge.

Evaluation is an integral part of research, so it should be a familiar and friendly concept to MORE grantees. Evaluation is the means by which we examine our results. Why is it that there is less anxiety when we evaluate experiments in our research? Perhaps it is because we analyze our research in regular, definable steps, and we have accepted that evaluation is in the nature of what we do. We accept that if the resolution of an experiment is not within certain acceptable standards, we re-examine and refine our setup, we make new reagents, we super-clean the glassware. We work to optimize our chances of getting a clean result that will set the standard for those who follow. Our evaluation of our research is ongoing. Each data point, each trial, each figure or photograph is examined with an eye toward improvement or setting a new benchmark. In our research there is no negative emotion tied to this evaluation. It is simply the way we work.

How can we apply a similar approach to solving the problem of too few underrepresented minorities in biomedical research? Shouldn't we, as scientists, keep our scientific perspective when trying to tackle this large and important problem? If the answer is yes, then we have to start with clear goals and specific, measurable objectives. These are our aims. How specific should they be? We have come a long way in the past 20 or more years, so our aims should be more crisp and measurable than what may have sufficed when the programs were initiated two decades ago.

The programs have been going along nicely for more than 20 years. Why is evaluation so important now?

It is safe to say that evaluation has always been important--we just paid less attention to it in the past. With the challenge of getting programs accepted at NIH and then started at minority institutions, an optimism prevailed that we were on the right path and should just forge ahead. Now we see that being on the path and making progress down the path are two different things. As concerned scientists, we want to know whether our experiments are working as planned.

Why ask the institution to set goals against which it will be evaluated?

There is quite a heterogeneity among grantees of MORE programs with respect to size and institutional missions--one size does not fit all. It is more reasonable for a school to set specific objectives for itself than to have one generic set of objectives proposed by NIH. Once the schools' objectives are set, the peer review process can then judge whether the goals and plans to achieve them are competitive. We expect that there will still be data--such as the number and quality of publications, number of majors, graduation rates, and years to degree--that should be available and comparable from all grantees.

What assistance will the MORE Division provide?

Both the MARC and the MBRS Programs are building evaluation activities into the allowable costs for the programs. It might be reasonable to provide as much as 5 percent of the budget for evaluation activities. The MORE Division is considering supporting, through cooperative agreements, technical assistance in the form of training workshops for principal investigators to gain a deeper knowledge of evaluation. We hope to initiate these workshops by the summer of 1997.

Justification for Program Secretaries

by Toni Holland, Grants Administration Branch, NIGMS

The last few years have seen many changes in the MBRS and MARC Programs, some programmatic and others in grants management policies. One of the primary reasons for the changes in grants policies is due to the recent revisions of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21. This circular, entitled "Cost Principles for Educational Institutions," establishes principles for determining costs applicable to Federal grants, contracts, and other sponsored agreements with educational institutions. The circular further delineates what costs can be charged as direct costs and which ones should be charged as indirect costs.

Two recent revisions of A-21 have resulted in major changes in how grantee institutions can charge costs to grants. The first revision was in July 1993, and the second was in May 1996. This article highlights the most significant changes resulting from the revisions of A-21 and discusses the impact these changes have had on MORE programs.

Circular A-21 Revision, July 1993

In July 1993, OMB Circular A-21 was revised to define the criteria for charging salaries of administrative and clerical staff to federally sponsored grants and cooperative agreements. This revision clarified the principle that the salaries of administrative and clerical staff should usually be treated as indirect costs, but that direct charging of these costs may be appropriate where the nature of the work performed under a particular project requires an extensive amount of administrative or clerical support that is significantly greater than the routine level of such services provided by academic departments.

After reviewing this revision, NIGMS staff determined that both the MBRS and the MARC Programs could be classified as large, complex programs, thus meeting the criteria for direct charging of secretaries. In making this determination, however, it was noted that all requests for secretarial support must be strongly justified, with a clear link to the type and amount of work required by the grant activities. In presenting the justification, applicants are cautioned against describing activities that are normally classified as indirect costs, such as bookkeeping and payroll functions. The need for strong justification was further emphasized to program directors at a meeting held in November 1994 in Washington, DC.

Because the request for secretarial support must be based on the amount of work, the percent effort must be in keeping with the size of the program. Under normal circumstances, only the largest MBRS programs--those with 18 to 20 subprojects--should expect to be approved and funded for a 100 percent position providing secretarial/clerical work. Position titles such as "administrative officer" or "administrative assistant" are still classified as secretarial/clerical support and are subject to the above-noted guidelines.

Circular A-21 Revision, May 1996

Circular A-21 was revised for a second time this past spring. The main purpose of this revision, which became effective on May 8, 1996, was to tighten the rules of allowability and allocation of costs, and to promote greater standardization in the treatment of costs. There are several changes within the revision that will have direct bearing on the MBRS Program.

The term "indirect costs" has been changed to "facilities and administrative costs" to more accurately reflect the types of costs within educational institutions. Facilities and administrative rates are calculated at the time of the competing award and will remain the same for the competitive segment, even if the actual rate changes in future years. The total costs reflected on the Notice of Grant Award will be applicable for the entire project period.

The equipment capitalization threshold has been raised to $5,000. Grantee institutions may elect to continue to track equipment utilizing a lower threshold; however, the threshold that is chosen must be used consistently for all federally funded activities at that institution.

Questions about either of these revisions should be directed to the grants management specialist listed on your most recent Notice of Grant Award.

OMB Circular A-21 is available on the Internet at http://www.gpo.ucop.edu/. For a hard copy, contact the Government Printing Office. The NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts and the PHS Grants Policy Statement are available on the NIH home page at http://www.nih.gov/. For a hard copy, contact your NIGMS grants management specialist or your institution's business office.

Profile: Sanya Springfield, Ph.D.

This special section profiles former MARC and MBRS participants who have excelled in their fields. We hope that the profiles will give students an idea of the types of careers available with science degrees, and the paths others have taken to achieve those careers.

Dr. Springfield, a former MBRS participant at Howard University in Washington, DC, is now a program director with the National Cancer Institute's Comprehensive Minority Biomedical Program. In her position, Springfield serves as an advisor to top management on issues relating to the participation of minorities in cancer-related research and training activities, the effectiveness of programs in cancer medicine and cancer control in reaching the minority community and other historically underserved segments of the population, and minority community initiatives that seek to reduce the national cancer mortality rate. Prior to coming to NIH, Springfield worked as a program director in the Division of Integrative Biology and Neuroscience at the National Science Foundation (NSF). From 1985-1995, she was a faculty member in the department of biology at the City College of the City University of New York (CCNY), where she was the recipient of an NSF Minority Research Initiation Award. She received her B.S. in zoology and her Ph.D. in physiology and neurobiology from Howard University. Her postdoctoral work was supported by an NIH National Research Service Award at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in Piscataway, NJ.

HOW I BECAME INTERESTED IN SCIENCE: As a child, I was hospitalized for an illness, but instead of focusing on it, I spent most of my time helping to care for the cute little babies who were there because they, too, had some illness. It was my concern for these babies that prompted the nurses on the ward to predict that I would become a pediatrician one day. As the years passed, I forgot that prediction.

Once I decided to go to college, an aunt suggested that I attend her alma mater, Howard University. When choosing my major, I remembered those sick children I met in the hospital and the nurses' prediction. I entered college as a pre-med student. As a result of my high academic performance during my first year of college, I was selected to be one of the first undergraduate biology teaching assistants. I taught an undergraduate zoology laboratory, and this is where I received my first exposure to the world of research. This exposure allowed me to learn that there was more to medicine than a patient-oriented practice, and that, in fact, one could study the mechanism of disease action or how a cell in the brain worked. After spending a couple of years teaching science, I decided to enter a graduate school program that would afford me the opportunity to teach and perform research at a higher level.

HOW THE MARC/MBRS PROGRAM HELPED ME: If it were not for the support from MBRS, I would not be where I am today. When I applied to graduate school to pursue a Ph.D. in physiology, I was accepted as an MBRS student participant. I was paid to work in a laboratory, and the program also enabled me to travel to various scientific meetings that broadened my exposure to research.

As a professor and researcher at CCNY, I trained over a dozen MBRS and MARC students ranging from the high school to the graduate level. These students became my life's blood and gave me the opportunity to influence another generation of young minority researchers.

THING I ENJOY MOST ABOUT SCIENCE: I have learned to enjoy and expect the unexpected--there is nothing routine about research. Each day represents a new challenge.

MY ROLE MODEL: I have had several role models along the way. My first role model was an aunt who was the first in our family to obtain a college education. She stressed the importance of higher education. My second was a high school science teacher who taught me the challenges of science and that curiosity has its rewards. The most important role model, however, has been Dr. Nathaniel Pitts, who has been my mentor since I was a graduate student. He taught me the importance of being a good mentor. Dr. Pitts, who is now the director of Science and Technology Centers at NSF, has played a pivotal role in all of my professional endeavors. His goal is for me to surpass his accomplishments.

MY ADVICE TO STUDENTS ENTERING/CONSIDERING SCIENTIFIC CAREERS: Use every experience (whether positive or negative) as the foundation for the next. Make sure that you are always flexible enough and open-minded enough to walk through doors as they open. Accepting the challenge of teaching my peers as an undergraduate provided me with the opportunity to learn that teaching was something I enjoyed and wanted to pursue at a higher level. My experiences as a professor and researcher allowed me the opportunity to participate in activities outside of my academic environment, which led me to discover that there were not enough people like myself doing what I was doing. My work on various committees to help increase the number of underrepresented minorities in all areas of research (basic science and biomedical) helped me to obtain my current position as a director of the Comprehensive Minority Biomedical Program at the National Cancer Institute.

If you know an outstanding former MARC or MBRS participant who has excelled professionally and you would like to nominate that person as a future Update profile subject, please let us know. Your suggestions are always welcome.

News and Notes

We are always interested in hearing about NIGMS minority program faculty, alumni, and students. Please drop us a line and let us know where you are and what you are doing.

Send information to:
Editor
NIGMS Minority Programs Update
Room 3AS.43
45 Center Drive MSC 6200
Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
Telephone: (301) 496-7301
Fax: (301) 402-0224
email atheys@nigms.nih.gov

Selected Publications by MARC and MBRS Faculty and Students

(listed by institution)

Alabama State University
Singh SP, Williams YU, Benjamin WH, Klebba PE, Boyd D. Immunoprotection by monoclonal antibodies to the porins and lipopolysaccharide of Salmonella typhimurium. Microb Pathog 1996;21:1-15.

Arizona State University
Snook RR, Markow TA. Possible role of nonfertilizing sperm as a nutrient source for female Drosophila pseudoobscura frolova (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Pan-Pacific Entomologist 1996;72:121-9.

California State University, Fullerton
Weber BH, Depew DJ. Natural selection and self-organization. Biology & Philosophy 1996;11:33-66.

California State University, Los Angeles
Fratiello A, Kubo-Anderson V, Adanalyan A, Bolanos EL, Ortega JV, Perrigan RD, Saenz L. A direct hydrogen-1, carbon-13 and nitrogen-15 NMR study of magnesium (II)-isothiocyanate complexing. J Solution Chem 1995;24:1249-64.

Godjoian G, Ayala A, Martinez R, Martinez-Bernhardt R, Wang VR, Gutierrez CG. Substituted triethylene glycols from dibutylstannylene acetals. Tetrahedron Lett 1996;37:433-6.

Lee H, Jaballas J, Onak T. Correlation of experimental structural and 11B NMR data to calculational results for the [2-CH3CN-B10H9]- ion. Main Group Metal Chemistry 1996;19:1-8.

Marinez ER, Salmassian EK, Lau T, Gutierrez CG. Enterobactin and enantioenterobactin. J Org Chem 1996;61:3548-50.

Phinney JS, Cobb NJ. Reasoning about intergroup relations among Hispanic and Euro-American adolescents. J Adolesc Res 1996;11:306-24.

Sharp SB, Kim S, Lee M, Sunday L, Enriquez E, Villalvazo M, Ghebremedhin A, Carvajal LS, Momjian P, Avari S. Culture of C2C12 and BC3H1 myogenic cells with iron-supplemented calf serum; rapid media screen. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol (Animal) 1995;31:749-51.

Yeh I, Tsai S, Catuira E, Le TT, Papa V, Pena L, Vasquez M, Vu C, Wang S, Lopez GA, Tam CF. Plasma triglyceride levels correlate with body weight, age and gender influence body weight changes in Spermophilus lateralis during prehibernation and hibernation. Comp Biochem Physiol Part A 1996;113:255-65.

Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science
Taylor SC, Shacks SJ, Mitchell RA. In vitro lymphocyte blastogenic responses and cytokine production in sickle cell disease patients with acute pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1996;15:340-4.

Fisk University
Elliott IW, Sloan MJ, Tate E. Synthetic entry to dibenzo [b,f] oxinin and dibenzo [b,f] azonine derivatives through a dibenzo [a,e] cycloocten-5-one. Tetrahedron 1996;52:8063-98.

Florida A&M; University
Pelle CJ, Okoro CO, Redda KK. The synthesis of several n-(substituted phenylcarbonylamino)-4-(3-cyclohexenyl)-1, 2, 3, 6-tetrahydropyridines as potential anti-inflammatory agents. Syn Commun 1996;26:2703-14.

Hunter College
deNobel H, Lipke PN, Kurjan J. Identification of a ligand-binding site in an immunoglobulin fold domain of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae adhesion protein alpha-agglutinin. Mol Biol Cell 1996;7:143-54.

Kapteyn JC, Montijn RC, Vink E, de la Cruz J, Llobell A, Douwes JE, Shimoi H, Lipke PN, Klis FM. Retention of Saccharomyces cerevisiae cell wall proteins through a phosphodiester-linked B-1,3-/B-1,6-glucan heteropolymer. Glycobiology 1996;6:337-45.

Kentucky State University
Kochhar TS, Howard W, Hoffman S, Brammer-Carleton L. Effect of trivalent and pentavalent arsenic in causing chromosome alterations in cultured Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells. Toxicol Lett 1996;84:37-42.

New Mexico State University
Samaniego F, Markham PD, Gallo RC, Ensoli B. Inflammatory cytokines induce AIDS-Kaposi's sarcoma-derived spindle cells to produce and release basic fibroblast growth factor and enhance Kaposi's sarcoma-like lesion formation in nude mice. J Immunol 1995;154:3582-92.

Northern Arizona University
O'Reilly SR, Nishikawa KC. Mechanism of tongue protraction during prey capture in the spadefoot toad Spea multiplicata (Anuara: Pelobatidae). J Exp Zoology 1995;273:282-96.

Prairie View A&M; University
Doctor VM, Hill C, Jackson GJ. Effect of fucoidan during activation of human plasminogen. Thromb Res 1995;79:237-47.

Simmons RB, Newton GR, Doctor VM. Effects of sulfated xylans during the interaction of 125I-thrombin with antithrombin III or heparin cofactor II of human plasma. Eur J Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics 1995;20:162-6.

Tanyi A, Benjamin V, Sadberry AJ, Doctor VM. Fluorescence and circular dichroism studies during the interactions of sulfated polysaccharides with antithrombin III. Thromb Res 1995;77:505-13.

Selma University
Chetty CS, Rajanna S, Hall E, Yallapragada PR, Rajanna B. In vitro and in vivo effects of lead, methyl mercury and mercury on inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate and 1,3,4,5-tetrakisphosphate receptor bindings in rat brain. Toxicol Lett 1996;87:11-7.

Rajanna B, Chetty CS, Rajanna S, Hall E, Fail S, Yallapragada PR. Modulation of protein kinase C by heavy metals. Toxicol Lett 1995;81:197-203.

Rajanna B, Yallapragada PR, Hall E, Rajanna S. In vitro effect of lead on Ca2+-ATPase in synaptic plasma membranes and microsomes of rat cerebral cortex and cerebellum. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 1996;33:157-62.

Yallapragada PR, Rajanna S, Fail S, Rajanna B. Inhibition of calcium transport by mercury salts in rat cerebellum and cerebral cortex in vitro. J Appl Toxicol 1996;16:325-30.

University of Southern Colorado
Proctor KG, Ramirez SK, Williams KL, Huerta JL, Kirkland JJ. The progressive effect of surface silylation on the silanol population of silica. In: Pesek JJ, Matyska M, Abuelafiya R, eds. Chemically Modified Surfaces: Recent Developments. United Kingdom: The Royal Society of Chemistry 1996;45-60.

Stillman College
Singh J, Hill M, Moore-Cheatum L. Carbon monoxide pollution alters gestational hematology in protein-deficient mice. Toxic Substance Mechanisms 1995;14:281-92.

Texas Woman's University
Maswood S, Andrate M, Uphouse L. Protective actions of the 5HT2A/2C receptor agonist, DOI, on 5-HT1A receptor-mediated inhibition of lordosis behavior. Neuropharmacology 1996;35:497-502.

Uphouse L, Andrade M, Jackson A. 5-HT1A receptor antagonists and lordosis behavior. Neuropharmacology; 1996;35:489-96.

Uphouse L, Colon L, Wolf A. Effects of mianserin and ketanserin on lordosis behavior after systemic treatment or infusion into the ventromedial nucleus of the hypothalamus. Brain Res 1996;718:46-52.

University of Maryland School of Medicine
Ufret-Vincenty CA, Short AD, Alfonso A, Gill DL. A novel Ca2+ entry mechanism is turned on during growth arrest induced by Ca2+ pool depletion. J Biol Chem 1995;270:26790-3.

Xavier University
Ghosh D, Klein CL, Garner B, Andersen PH, Crider AM. Synthesis and evaluation of cis-1-methyl-3-n-propyl-2,3,3a,4,5,9b-hexahydro-1H-benz(e)-indoles for in vitro dopamine D1 and D2 receptor binding affinity. Eur J Med Chem 1995;30:943-8.

Send in your references for inclusion in Selected Publications. We would appreciate your contribution to this section in order to represent as many MARC and MBRS programs as possible. Complete bibliographical citations can be phoned, faxed, mailed, or e-mailed to the Editor.

Recent Awards and Fellowships

Predoctoral Fellowships for Minority Students
(listed by fellow and graduate institution)

Joseph Acosta, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Adriana Ahumada, New York Medical College, Valhalla.
Karen A. Allen, University of California, Irvine.
Paul Anaya, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
Elizabeth Arias, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Gabriel F. Berriz, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Ericka M. Boone, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Carlos H. Buitrago, University of California, Davis.
Shuntele N. Burns, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Allyson M. Campbell, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
Aida M. Cancel, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Maria C. Carles, Northeastern University, Boston, MA.
Gary B. Conyers, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Abinbola Dada, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Russell A. Debose-Boyd, University of Oklahoma Heath Sciences Center, Oklahoma City.
Carla L. Easter, University of California, San Diego.
Carla R. Edge, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Anissa D. Evans, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Daniel A. Fajardo, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Roger A. Forsyth, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA.
Gloria M. Fuentes, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
Tonya M. Gerald, University of Maryland, Baltimore.
Tara S. Givens, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN.
Jose E. Gomez, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities.
Annette M. Gonzalez, University of California, San Diego.
Grace M. Gonzalez, George Washington University, Washington, DC.
Donnella S. Green, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Judson L. Haynes, Louisiana State University and A&M; College, Baton Rouge.
Tabmitha P. Jervey, Eastern Virginia Medical School of The Medical College of Hampton Roads, Norfolk.
Margaret I. Kanipes, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Louis F. Lecour, Jr., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Arlene Leon, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Daniel Llanes, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Keith A. McGee, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg.
Kyran O. Mitchell, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Crystal A. Moore, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.
Debra D. Murray, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Angela Paez, University of Washington, Seattle.
Charles A. Peters, Jr., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Felicia A. Powell, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Russell R. Reid, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Virgen S. Rodriguez, University of Maryland, College Park.
Nayma E. Ruiz-Garcia, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Janice V. Scobie, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Viviana R. Simon, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Joseph A. Sisneros, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne.
Corey W. Turner, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN.
Suzanne E. Vittimberga, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Chad A. Womack, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.

MORE Faculty Development Awards
(listed by institution and faculty member)

Tougaloo College, Tougaloo, MS, Bam D. Mehrotra.

Upcoming Meetings

November 14-17, 1996
American Indian Science and Engineering Society, 18th Annual National Conference, Salt Palace Convention Center, Salt Lake City, UT. Contact: AISES, 1630 30th St., Boulder, CO 80301; phone (303) 939-0023.

December 7-11, 1996
International Congress on Cell Biology/American Society for Cell Biology, Annual Meeting, Moscone Convention Center, San Francisco, CA. Contact: ASCB, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3998; phone (301) 530-7153.

March 2-6, 1997
Biophysical Society, Annual Meeting, New Orleans Convention Center, New Orleans, LA. Contact: Biophysical Society, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3998; phone (301) 530-7114.

March 26-28, 1997
Association of Minority Health Professions Schools, Annual Symposium, Houston, TX. Contact: Beatrice Raiford; phone (404) 752-1634.

April 6-10, 1997
Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Experimental Biology `97, New Orleans Convention Center, New Orleans, LA. Contact: Meetings Department, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3996; phone (301) 530-7019.

April 13-17, 1997
American Chemical Society, 213th National Meeting, Moscone Convention Center, San Francisco, CA. Contact: Department of Meetings, Expositions, and Divisional Activities, ACS, 1155 16th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036; phone (202) 872-4396.

May 4-8, 1997
American Society for Microbiology, General Meeting, Miami Beach, FL. Contact: Meetings Department, ASM, 1325 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20005-4171; phone (202) 942-9356.

August 24-29, 1997
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Annual Meeting/17th International Congress of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Moscone Convention Center, San Francisco, CA. Contact: Meetings Department, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3996; phone 530-7019.

Acronyms Used in this Issue

ASU - Alabama State University
CCNY - City College of New York
MARC - Minority Access to Research Careers
MBRS - Minority Biomedical Research Support
MIRT - Minority International Research Training
MORE - Minority Opportunities in Research
NAS - National Achievement Scholars
NCI - National Cancer Institute
NIDDK - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
NIGMS - National Institute of General Medical Sciences
NIH - National Institutes of Health
NSF - National Science Foundation
OMB - Office of Management and Budget
OMH - Office of Minority Health
PHS - Public Health Service
PRAT - Pharmacology Research Associate
USC - University of Southern Colorado